26

Offences and Prosecution

26.1 Summary of Offences and Prosecution
While penalties may be imposed by the income-tax authorities, the imposition of a fine or the
launching of prosecution for any offence under the Act can be made only by the Magistrate of
a Court under sections 275A to 280. In respect of the same default of an assessee, penalty
may be imposed and a prosecution also may be launched against him.
Section Nature of default Rigorous
imprisonment
Fine
275A Contravention of order made under the
second proviso to sub-section (1) or sub-
section (3) of section 132 regarding search
and seizure
Upto 2 Years No limit
specified
275B Failure to afford the authorized officer the
necessary facility to inspect the books of
account or other documents as required
under section 132(1)(iib)
Upto 2 years No limit
specified
276 Removal, concealment, transfer or delivery
of property to thwart tax recovery
Upto 2 years No limit
specified
276A Failure to comply with the provisions of
section 178(1) and (3) regarding company in
liquidation or parting with any of the assets
of the company or the properties in his
hands in contravention of the provision of
section 276A
6 months to 2
years
No limit
specified
276AB Failure to comply with the provisions of
section 269UC or 269UE or 269UL relating
surrendering of property to Central
Government
6 months to 2
years
No limit
specified
276B Failure to pay to the Central Government,
tax deducted under the provisions of
Chapter XVII-B or the tax payable by him,
as required by (i) section 115-O(2); or (ii)
Second proviso to section 194B
3 months to 7
years
No limit
specified

The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
26.2 Income-Tax

276BB Failure to pay to the Central
Government tax collected under section
206C
3 months to 7 years No limit
specified
276C(1) Wilful attempt to evade tax, penalty or
interest.
Evaded tax exceeding
25 lakh: 6 months to 7
years Other cases : 3
months to 2 years
No limit
specified
276C(2) Wilful attempt to evade payment of tax,
penalty or interest.
3 months to 2 years No limit
specified
276CC Wilful failure to furnish in due time a
return of income u/s 139(1) or u/s
142(1)(i) or 148 or 153A.
Note: If return of income under section
139(1) is furnished before expiry of the
assessment year or the tax payable by
him on the total income determined on
regular assessment reduced by
advance tax and TDS does not exceed
` 3000 - No prosecution.
Evaded tax exceeding
25 lakh : 6 months to 7
years Other cases: 3
months to 2 years
No limit
specified
276D Willful failure to produce accounts and
documents under section 142(1)/
142(2A)
Up to one year ` 4 to
` 10 for
every
day of
default.
277 False statements in verification. Evaded tax exceeding
25 lakh: 6 months to 7
years
In other cases: 3
months to 2 years
No limit
specified
277A Falsification of books or documents, etc.
to induce or abet any person to evade
any tax, penalty or interest chargeable
or imposable under the Act. It is not
necessary to prove that the other
person has actually evaded any tax,
penalty or interest chargeable or
imposable under the Act for the purpose
of establishing the charge under this
section.
Imprisonment of 3
months to 2 years.
No limit
specified
The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
Offences and Prosecution 26.3

278 Abetment of false return etc. (relating to
any income chargeable to tax)
Evaded tax exceeding
25 lakh: 6 months to 7
years
In other cases: 3
months to 2 years
No limit
specified
278A Second and subsequent offences
under section 276B, 276C(1), 276CC,
276DD, 276E, 277, 278.
6 months to 7 years for
every subsequent
offence
No limit
specified
280(1) Disclosure of particulars by public
servants in contravention of Section
138(2). Prosecution after previous
sanction of Central Government under
section 280(2).
Up to 6 months No limit
specified
Note Increased limits for applicability of rigorous punishment under section 276C,
276CC, 277, 277A & 278
The punishable offences as well as the prosecution for such offences under the Income-tax
Act, 1961 are discussed under Chapter XXII. Prosecution provisions under the Income-tax
Act, 1961 are used as a tool for effective enforcement of tax laws and deterring tax
avoidance and tax evasion.
Under sections 276C (Punishment for willful attempt to evade tax, etc), 276CC (Punishment
for failure to furnish returns of income), 277 (Punishment for making false statement in
verification) and 278 (Punishment for abetment of false return, etc), in a case where the
amount of tax, penalty or interest, as the case may be, which would have been evaded by a
person exceeds ` 1,00,000, he shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term
which shall not be less than six months but which may extend to seven years and with fine.
In case the amount which would have been evaded by a person does not exceed ` 1,00,000,
he shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a termwhich shall not be less than
three months but which may extend to three years and with fine.
Since the threshold of ` 1,00,000 was introduced more than three and a half decades back,
in 1975, the same has now been increased to ` 25,00,000 with effect from1
st
J uly, 2012. The
maximumtermof imprisonment where the amount which would have been evaded by a
person does not exceed ` 25,00,000 has been reduced from3 years to 2 years with effect
from1
st
J uly, 2012.
Therefore, in case the amount sought to be evaded exceeds ` 25,00,000, the assessee may
be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a termnot less than 6 months extended to a
maximumof 7 years and with fine. In case the amount sought to be evaded is less than or
equal to ` 25,00,000 the person may be punishable with rigorous imprisonment which shall
not be less than 3 months extended to a maximumof 2 years with fine.
The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
26.4 Income-Tax

The maximum time limit for rigorous imprisonment under section 277A, imposing
punishment for falsification of books of account or document, etc, has also been reduced
from3 years to 2 years.
Section 278AA provides that where a reasonable cause for the failure is proved, punishment
shall not be imposed for offences specified in sections 276A, 276AB and 276B.
For the purposes of offences and prosecutions, the following individuals will be deemed to be
guilty of the offence committed by the respective person
Person Section Individual
Company 278B Every person in charge of affairs; Director, Manager,
Secretary and every officer who is guilty of offence
Firm 278B Partner
AOP/BOI 278B Members controlling the affairs
HUF 278C Karta or member either by acquiescence or negligence.
Section 278B(3) provides that if an offence under the Act has been committed by a person
being a company, it shall be punished with fine. Every other person who was in charge of and
was responsible for the conduct of business of the company, or any director, manager,
secretary or other officer of the company (with whose consent or connivance or due to whose
neglect the offence was committed) would be liable for punishment of imprisonment and fine
wherever so provided.
26.2 Power of Commissioner to grant immunity fromprosecution
[Section 278AB]
Section 278AB empowers the Commissioner to grant immunity from prosecution -
(i) The application for the immunity must be made by the assessee (person whose case has
been abated under section 245HA) to the Commissioner of Income-tax before institution
of the prosecution proceedings after abatement.
(ii) The assessee can approach the Commissioner for immunity any time if prosecution
proceedings were instituted before or during the pendency of settlement proceedings.
However, if the assessee has received any notice etc. from the Income-tax authority for
institution of prosecution, then he must apply to the Commissioner for immunity, before
actual institution of prosecution.
(iii) The Commissioner can grant immunity, subject to such conditions as he may think fit to
impose, on being satisfied that the assessee has
(a) co-operated in the proceedings after abatement; and
(b) made a full and true disclosure of his income and the manner in which such income
has been derived.
(iv) Where application for settlement under section 245C had been made before the 1st
The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
Offences and Prosecution 26.5

June, 2007, the Commissioner can also grant immunity from prosecution for any offence
under this Act or under the Indian Penal Code or under any other Central Act.
(v) If the assessee fails to comply with any condition subject to which the immunity was
granted, the same would be withdrawn.
(vi) The immunity granted to a person may, at any time, be withdrawn by the
Commissioner, if he is satisfied that such person had, in the course of any proceedings,
after abatement, -
(a) concealed any particulars material to the assessment from the income-tax authority; or
(b) given false evidence.
Consequently, the person may be tried for the offence with respect to which the immunity
was granted or for any other offence of which he appears to have been guilty in
connection with the proceedings.
26.3 Presumption with regard to assets, books of accounts [Section
278D]
Section 278D provides that in case where, during the course of any search made under
section 132, any money, bullion, jewelry or other valuable articles or things or any books of
account or other documents had been found in the possession or control of any person and
such assets or books of account or other documents are tendered by the prosecution in
evidence against such person and/or against any person who is convicted of an offence under
section 278, the provisions of section 132(4A) would apply, in relation to all such books of
account and other documents. Accordingly, it would be presumed that such books of account
or other documents and assets belong to the person in whose control or possession they were
found, at the time of search and also that the contents of such books of account and other
documents are true.
Similarly, in cases where any books of accounts or other documents and assets are taken into
custody from the possession or control of any person by the officer or authority specified in
section 132A(1)(a) or (c) and these are delivered to the requisitioning officer under section
132A(2), it would be presumed that the presumption similar to the one mentioned earlier would
operate in these cases as well. It would be for assessee to rebut the presumption wherever
necessary by producing cogent and reliable evidence.
26.4 Presumption as to culpable mental state [Section 278E]
1. In any prosecution for any offence under this Act which requires a culpable mental state
on the part of the accused, the court shall presume the existence of such mental state
but it shall be a defence for the accused to prove the fact that he had no such mental
state with respect to the act charged as an offence in that prosecution.
2. Culpable mental state includes intention, motive or knowledge of a fact or belief in, or
reason to believe, a fact.
3. For the purposes of this section a fact is said to be proved only when the court believes it
The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
26.6 Income-Tax

to exist beyond reasonable doubt and not merely when its existence is established by a
preponderance of probability.
Students may note that penalty proceedings being quasi-criminal in nature, it has been
judicially held in the context of various penalty and prosecution proceedings, that the burden is
on the department to establish that the assessee concealed the particulars of his income or
deliberately furnished inaccurate particulars thereof and it is not enough for the revenue
merely to show that a certain amount was received by the assessee. Section 278E has clearly
overruled this view and has specifically placed the burden of proof on the assessee.
It specifically provided that where any prosecution requires a culpable mental state (mens rea)
the court shall presume the existence of such mental state but the assessee is entitled to
prove that he had no such mental state with respect to the act charged with. Thus, the burden
to prove the non-existence of mens rea has been effectively placed on the assessee.
26.5 Prosecution to be made at the instance of the Chief
Commissioner or Commissioner [Sections 279 and 279A]
Section 279(1) provides that the proceedings to punish a person for an offence under Sections
275A, 275B, 276, 276A, 276B, 276BB, 276C, 276CC, 276D, 277, 277A and 278 can be
initiated only after previous sanction of the Commissioner or the Commissioner (Appeals) or
the appropriate authority. However, the Chief Commissioner or the Director General may issue
such instructions or directions to the said authorities for institution of proceedings under
section 279(1). An offence may either before or after the institution of prosecution
proceedings be compounded by the concerned authorities under Section 279(2). If a person is
proceeded against under any of the provisions of Sections 275A to 278, then a statement
made or account or documents produced before any authority under Act shall not be
inadmissible as evidence for purpose of the prosecution proceedings merely on the ground
that such account or document was produced or statement was made in the belief that the
penalty imposable would be reduced or waived under section 273A or that the offence would
be compounded.
Section 279A provides that offences punishable under Sections 276B, 276C, 276CC, 277 and
278 shall be deemed to be non-cognizable offences. Section 279B deals with proof of entries
in record or other documents in the custody of income-tax authority. Section 280 deals with
disclosure of particulars by public servants.
26.6 Proof of entries in records or documents [Section 279B]
Entries in the records or other documents in the custody of an income-tax authority shall be
admitted in evidence in any proceedings for the prosecution of any person for an offence under this
Chapter, and all such entries may be proved either by the production of the records or other
documents in the custody of the income-tax authority containing such entries, or by the production
of a copy of the entries certified by the income-tax authority having custody of the records or other
documents under its signature and stating that it is a true copy of the original entries and that such
original entries are contained in the records of other documents in its custody.
The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
Offences and Prosecution 26.7

26.7 Disclosure of particulars by public servants [Section 280]
If a public servant furnishes any information or produces any document in contravention of
section 138(2), he shall be punishable with imprisonment which may extend to 6 months and
shall also be liable to pay fine.
However, no prosecution shall be instituted under this section except with the previous
sanction of the Central Government.
26.8 Prosecution mechanism strengthened [Sections 280A, 280B,
280C & 280D]
(i) In order to further strengthen the prosecution mechanismnew sections 280A,
280B, 280C and 280D have been inserted with effect from1
st
J uly, 2012
(1) providing for constitution of Special Courts for trial of offences.
(2) application of summons trial for offences under the Act to expedite
prosecution proceedings as the procedures in a summons trial are simpler
and less time consuming.
(3) providing for appointment of public prosecutors.
(ii) Constitution of Special Courts & Offences triable by Special Court [Sections 280A
& 280B]
(1) Under section 280A, for the purpose of trial of offences under Chapter XXII i.e.
Offences & Procecution, one or more courts of Magistrate of the first class
may be designated by the Central Government, in consultation with the Chief
J ustice of the High Court, by way of a notification as Special Court for such
area or areas or for such cases or class or group of cases as may be specified
in the notification.
(2) A Special Court, while trying an offence punishable under the Act, shall also
try any other offence with which the accused may be charged, under the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
(3) Under section 280B, the offences punishable under Chapter XXII, shall be
triable only by the Special Court, if so designated, for the area or areas or for
cases or class or group of cases, as the case may be, in which the offence has
been committed. This is notwithstanding anything containing in the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973
(4) However, a court competent to try offences under section 292 which has been
designated as a Special Court under this section, shall continue to try the
offences before it or offences arising under the Act after such designation.
Further, a court competent to try offences under section 292, which has not
been designated as a Special Court under this section, may continue to try
such offence pending before it till its disposal.
The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
26.8 Income-Tax

(5) Further, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973, a Special Court may take cognizance of the offence for which
the accused is committed for trial, upon a complaint made by an authority
authorized in this behalf under the Act.
(iii) Trial of offences as summons case [Section 280C]
(1) The Special Court shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973, try an offence under Chapter XXII punishable with
imprisonment not exceeding two years or with fine or with both, as a
summons case.
(2) When an offence is so tried as a summons case, the provisions of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973, as applicable in the case of trial of summons case,
would be applicable.
(iv) Application of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to proceedings before Special
Court [Section 280D]
(1) The provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, including the
provisions regarding bails and bonds, would apply to proceedings before a
Special Court, unless otherwise provided under the Income-tax Act, 1961.
(2) The person conducting the prosecution before the Special Court shall be
deemed to be a Public Prosecutor.
(3) The Central Government may also appoint a Special Public Prosecutor for any
case or class or group of cases.
(4) A person shall be qualified for appointment as a Public Prosecutor or a
Special Public Prosecutor only if he has been in practice as an advocate for at
least seven years, requiring special knowledge of law.
(5) Every person appointed as Public Prosecutor or Special Public Prosecutor
under this section shall be deemed to be a Public Prosecutor within the
meaning of section 2(u) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The
provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, would have effect
accordingly.
The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India